Suchergebnisse

Over the past four decades, the leadership of the American Economic Association (AEA) has increase the number of women and minorities on its program at the annual Allied Social Science Association (ASSA) meetings. There are three reasons to diversifying the participants on the program. First, including women and minorities on the program make the demographic characteristics, or identities, of the meetings' participants more representative of the demographics of the profession. Second, having more women, people of color and foreign-born economists on the program encourages doubtful members of other minorities to become economists. Third, there is a belief that incorporating a wider range of economists, with different experiences and educational backgrounds, at the meetings will enrich the conversations and spur new ideas. Inclusivity implies an openness and willingness to incorporate different ways of thinking and perspectives. While the ASSA meetings appear to be more diverse with respect to institutional representation and gender, the evidence suggests that there is a structural barrier of hidden beneath the surface of these two demographics that prohibit inclusivity: class as measured by the strength of economists' top Ph.D. granting institutional connections. To uncover this barrier, this study examines the structure of the ASSA, the diversity of the ASSA Program Committee and the resultant diversity of the AEA program participants over the past 40 years. Findings suggest that increased diversity does not guarantee increased inclusivity.

Discussed are two major errors found in a utility theory analysis of criminal behavior by R. Stover & D. Brown ("Understanding Compliance and Noncompliance with Law: The Contributions of Utility Theory," Social Science Quarterly, 1975, 56, Dec, 363-375). As a result of misusing opportunity cost, the lawful wage rate was not included in their utility theory as a determining factor in criminal behavior. The study further errs in not considering attitudes toward risk of punishment. In Reply to Palmer and Bartlett, Robert V. Stover & Don W. Brown (U of Colorado, Boulder & U of California, Riverside) explain that their utility model extends beyond the conventions & vocabulary of traditional utility theory used by economists, & that this model can easily accommodate risk attitudes & other variables. The aim was to demonstrate the possibilities of utility theory in the study of legal compliance by presenting a general model. A. Rubins.

Findings are presented of a study examining earnings differences between male & female executives (total N = 457) who had graduated from 2 small liberal arts colleges. An expanded human capital model of wage determination is developed & estimated. Results of a 1984 questionnaire survey conducted of alumni of Wellesley Coll (Mass) & Denison U (Tex) indicate that human capital investments are important determinants of executive earnings, but gender, access to job-related information through networks, motivation, corporate size, & organizational differences are also significant explanatory variables. 4 Tables, 42 References. Modified HA

The impact of changes in family structure on the distribution of family income in the US is explored through comparisons of families in 1951 & 1976, utilizing data from the Current Population Reports series of the US Census Bureau. The recent increase in the proportion of families with employed wives has tended to decrease income inequality among M-headed families. At the same time, the recent increase in F-headed families has tended to increase overall family income inequality, offsetting the former trend & creating an illusion of distributional stability. 5 Tables. Modified HA.